$2\wedge 3\wedge 4$ could be $(2^3)^4$ or $2^{(3^4)}$. Does it make any difference? For both definitions, which is bigger: $r\wedge r\wedge r\wedge r\dots$ where the powers of $r$ go on for ever, or $(r^r)^r$, where $r$ is $\sqrt{2}$?

Sums of Squares and Sums of Cubes

Stage: 5

Article by Alan Beardon

Let $n$ be a whole number. When is it possible to write $n$ as a
sum of two squares, say $n=a^2+b^2$, or as a sum of three squares,
say $n=a^2+b^2 +c^2$, or as a sum of four squares, and so on? Of
course, $a$, $b$, $c$, $\ldots$ are also meant to be whole numbers
here. We can also ask whether there is any convenient test to
decide whether $n$ is the sum of one square; that is, whether $n$
is itself a square number, say $n=a^2$. In this article we shall
mention some of the interesting answers to these questions. The
proofs, which belong to the subject called Number Theory, are too
difficult to be given here, but take a look at the article
written by Tom Sanders, aged 16.

Although there seems to be no easy test to decide when $n$ is a
square number, it is easy to give a test to decide when an even
whole number $n$ is not a
square number. Suppose that $n$ is even and $n=a^2$. Then $a$ must
be even (for if $a$ is odd, then so is $a^2$), so that $a^2$ is
divisible by $r$. Thus if $n$ is even and a square number, then $4$
divides $n$ exactly. This shows, for example, that the number
$68792734815298359030284382$ (which is too big to put into your
calculator) is not a square number. Why does it show this? Well,
this number is of the form $100m+82$ and as $100$ is divisible by
$4$, we see that $n$ is divisible by $4$ if and only if $82$ is
(and it is not). Now you might like to write down some other (very
large) numbers that are not square numbers. Can you see why if $n$
is divisible by $3$ but not by $9$ then $n$ is not a square number?
(Try some examples of this.) What can you say about numbers
divisible by $5$ but not by $25$?

Now let us consider writing $n$ as the sum of two squares. There is
much we can say about this, but first we need to know about the
idea of a prime number. A whole number is a prime number if it has
no factors other than itself and $1$; for example, the first seven
prime numbers are $2$, $3$, $5$, $7$, $11$, $13$, $17$. Now every
whole number can be written as a product of prime numbers, and each
prime number is either $2$, or an odd number of the form $4k+1$, or
an odd number of the form $4k+3$; for example

Given a whole number $n$, look at all of the different prime
factors of the form $4k+3$ (ignoring the other prime factors) and
also the number of times that they occur; if every one of these
prime factors occurs an even number of times then $n$ can be
written as a sum of two squares; if not, then $n$ cannot be written
as the sum of two squares. (Another way of saying this is that $n$
can be written as the sum of two squares if and only if the product
of all of its prime factors of the form $4k+3$ is itself a square
number.) For example, $490$ and $2450$ can be written as a sum of
two squares but $350$ cannot. Try some other examples yourself; for
example, $36=4\times 3^2$ so $36$ can be written as a sum of two
squares, namely $6^2+0^2$. Try to decide which of the numbers $25$,
$37$, $99$ and $245$ can be written as a sum of two squares and
when they can, find what the two squares are. For $25$ (and
possibly some of the others) there is more than one answer.

Next, let us try to write $n$ as the sum of three squares. It is
known that this is possible if and only if $n$ is not of the form $4^m(8k+7)$ (where $m$
can be zero and $4^0=1$); for example, $53=4^0(8\times 6+5)$ can be
(try it), but $60=4(8+7)$ cannot (again try it, but not for too
long!). What about the numbers $30$, $48$, $77$ and $79$?

The problem of writing $n$ as the sum of three squares is closely
connected to the problem of writing $n$ as a sum of three
triangular numbers (a whole number $m$ is a triangular number if it
is of the form $k(k+1)/2$). For instance, it is known that every
number can be written as the sum of three triangular numbers, and
this means that every number of the form $8k+3$ can be written as
the sum of three squares. To see this suppose that $n=8k+3$ and
let
$$k=a(a+1)/2+b(b+1)/2+c(c+1)/2$$
Then $n$ can be written as a sum of three squares because
$$n=8k+3=(2a+1)^2+(2b+1)^2+(2c+1)^2$$
Finally, we may try to write $n$ as the sum of four (or more)
squares. In this case the answer is easy to state (but not to
prove) for every whole number can
be written as the sum of four squares! Of course, we may
wish to use $0$ as one of the square numbers, and there are often
several ways to do this; for
example,$$4=1^1+1^1+1^1+1^1=2^2+0^2+0^2+0^2$$
$$25=5^2+0^2+0^2+0^2=3^2+4^2+0^2+0^2=1^2+2^2+2^2+4^2$$
You should now choose some whole numbers yourself (not too large,
though) and try to express each as a sum of four squares.

One of the important steps in considering sums of two squares is
the formula $$(a^2+b^2)(c^2+d^2)=(a c+b d)^2+(a d-b c)^2=(a c-b
d)^2+(a d+b c)^2$$ which holds for any whole numbers $a$, $b$, $c$,
$d$. This formula shows ust hat if $n$ ($=a^2+b^2$) and $m$
($=c^2+d^2$) are the sum of two squares then so is their product $m
n$. To illustrate this, note that $5=2^2+1^2$ and $13=3^2+2^2$ so
we can take $a=2$, $b=1$, $c=3$, $d=2$ and so find $65$ ($=5\times
13$) as the sum of two squares in two different ways. A similar
formula to this holds for sums of four squares but sadly not for
sums of three squares (and it is the lack of such a formula that
makes the problem of sums of three squares more difficult to deal
with).

It is much harder to see when a number can be written as a sum of
cubes (for example $n=a^3+b^3$, or $n=a^3+b^3+c^3$), but it is
known that every whole number can be written as a sum of nine cubes
(including, if necessary, $0^3$); for example,
$$23=2^3+2^3+1^3+1^3+1^3+1^3+1^3+1^3+1^3$$
$$239=4^3+4^3+3^3+3^3+3^3+3^3+1^3+1^3+1^3$$ Curiously, these two
numbers ($23$ and $239$) are the only whole numbers that really do
need nine cubes; all other whole numbers need only at most eight
cubes. See if you can express the numbers $12$, $21$ and $73$ as
the sum of at most eight cubes in as many ways as possible.

The NRICH Project aims to enrich the mathematical experiences of all learners. To support this aim, members of the
NRICH team work in a wide range of capacities, including providing professional development for teachers wishing to
embed rich mathematical tasks into everyday classroom practice. More information on many of our other activities
can be found here.